Print

[hamwbone]

just my opinion so dont slam me guys. there are some very good games out there. but most have seemed very novlety to me. i loved the games i played, but only one time thru. i dont think ill play most of them again. to this day i still load up all 3 gta games on my xbox, cant stop playing them, and battlefield 2 on pc, cant stop playing it.  none of the games seem to have a real hook that want me to keep playing, after the movie is over im done. dont let it discourage you though, i thought every penny paid was worth it for all the games.  im just not feeling the replay value..   =)   HAM

[Deftech]

jaxo001, I have never been so impressed with launch titles as I have with the 360s offerings. Condemned and CoD 2 made me change my overall top 10 list, they are that good. Its more next gen than I imagined it would be.

Games that I wasnt expecting 2 like, such as GUN and Kong(cross platform titles), are addicting. And games that I had an open mind towards(PD Zero), sucked terribly in my opinion.

It will only get better, 2 more weeks and Recon!

Noone can tell you how you'll feel after owning one, you need to get it and judge for yourself.

[a pos ta fee s]

Out off all my friends that have the 360 maybe 2 said they like it. And these 2 were die hards people who's rooms are filled with every game and console to date and action figures of their favorite characters, and star wars light sabers that costed them more money than was worth and swears that every game purchase is worth it.

Basically people that are plain ole fashion die hards of gaming would vote for this console.

It's NOTHING to go crazy over, there haven't been any block buster games. Closest to that would be COD and most innovative is condemned, most replay value Geometry wars.

At 64 dollars a game I don't see the justification of spending all that money on subpar games but as some has said in previous post they do it because there is nothing else and MS has spaced it out perfectly in order for them to behave like fiends.

Maybe in a few more months like 6 months with better games, the camera, and others maybe the 360 would be a good buy as of this very moment I would recommend not to buy. I know it's hard not having something all the other kids are buying but trust me you could invest your money more wisely.

And if your that interested in it I will sell you my premium with remote and Condemned recharge kit and purchase some stock and recharge the 401k like I should have... but judge for yourself

's

[notsodiseased]

seriously, once Recon comes out its worth it, March fares well for the 360.

[KAGE360]

depending on what people were expecting you will get different responses.  IMHO, this is the best launch since the DC launch and even beats that one in some respects.  so far i have played through DoA4, condemned, CoD2, PGR3, PDZ, and king kong and they are all quality titles.  even though there wasnt a "killer app" i like it better to have many quality titles.  

my main gripe with the 360?  the d-pad on the controller    others will point to lack of features with movie playback or windows media center, but for someone who gets the game console just for gaming (like me) there are no complaints as it features more options then any system before it.

other then that, all is grand if your a gamer.

[TraZer]

To tell the truth... The only game that I have found being worth the money I spent on this console is Dead or Alive 4.
Perfect Dark was'nt impressing at all... just a solid FPS with a few levels, nothing we have'nt seen before... and the graphics was'nt all that marvelous either... but the worst has to be the framerate... shame on RARE to release a game for a next-gen console that runs in 30fps.
COD2 could just aswell be played on the old XBOX cause the it's practiaclly the same game with a little bit better graphics, nothing more... and this is the truth.
King Kong was crap... end of story.
Kameo Was cute... fun... but did'nt have that extra sparkle that you want to see in a platform/adventure game... this game also runs in 30fps, a shame.
PGR3 is a boring racing game... after you have completed several races and played for some hours you start to wonder where the hell all the fun is?... the game has no feeling what soo ever and you start to think you are driving a snail on ice... this game also run in 30fps and that ruins alot of the feeling too.. racing games should have a smooth 60fps in my oppinion.
Condemned was too short... otherwise it would've been an ok game even though it suffers from the 30fps illness.

This is all out of my oppinion and I have really tried to like those games I have mentioned here... but in the end this is'nt what you expect from a next generation console.
When I play a release title on a next generation console I want to be stunned by the graphics, the smooth gameplay, the perfect feeling we all felt the day the first XBOX was released and we saw Halo for the first time.
I hope upcoming games will have what I am looking for... cause right now I only play DOA4 and the demo version of that Marble game on Xbox Live Arcade

[revs]

I am not a hardcore gamer. I play my 360 about 2 or 3 hours a day, if that. I absolutely love it - It willt ake a lot to get me back to PC gaming.

I love how simple it is to play games on consoles.

Games wise - Kameo kicks ass, best game ive played in a long time. Call of Duty is very similar to the first version - which i loved, and so i love COD2 also.

PDZ is a bit meh, nothign that amazing.

Ridge Racer is a LOT better than I thought it would be, starts slow, but then gets very addictive - and online play is superb.

I dont know what everyone expects fromt he 360 - but I think its doing well - and as someone mentioned, in march we will be getting GR:AW and other great games!

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(TraZer @ Feb 22 2006, 09:02 AM)

To tell the truth... The only game that I have found being worth the money I spent on this console is Dead or Alive 4.
Perfect Dark was'nt impressing at all... just a solid FPS with a few levels, nothing we have'nt seen before... and the graphics was'nt all that marvelous either... but the worst has to be the framerate... shame on RARE to release a game for a next-gen console that runs in 30fps.
COD2 could just aswell be played on the old XBOX cause the it's practiaclly the same game with a little bit better graphics, nothing more... and this is the truth.
King Kong was crap... end of story.
Kameo Was cute... fun... but did'nt have that extra sparkle that you want to see in a platform/adventure game... this game also runs in 30fps, a shame.
PGR3 is a boring racing game... after you have completed several races and played for some hours you start to wonder where the hell all the fun is?... the game has no feeling what soo ever and you start to think you are driving a snail on ice... this game also run in 30fps and that ruins alot of the feeling too.. racing games should have a smooth 60fps in my oppinion.
Condemned was too short... otherwise it would've been an ok game even though it suffers from the 30fps illness.

This is all out of my oppinion and I have really tried to like those games I have mentioned here... but in the end this is'nt what you expect from a next generation console.
When I play a release title on a next generation console I want to be stunned by the graphics, the smooth gameplay, the perfect feeling we all felt the day the first XBOX was released and we saw Halo for the first time.
I hope upcoming games will have what I am looking for... cause right now I only play DOA4 and the demo version of that Marble game on Xbox Live Arcade

i understand that is all of your opinion, but dont you think your setting your expectations a bit too high?  

PDZ: i usually can tell the difference between 30 and 60fps and i thought that PDZ ran at 60fps.  also for a xbox port i thought the graphics were great, the only thing that really could have been addressed was the AI.  

CoD2 is far beyond what the xbox can do and that is the truth.  you base your assumptions on guessing when you dont even know the technical merits behind the game.  the AI alone is next gen enough, its far beyond what the xbox could do ever.  

as for the rest i have played and loved them all (accept kameo but only because im not into platformers).  you cant compare games right with each other because game development isnt as black and white as that.  also it would seem that your biggest issue with the games is the 30 fps.  however you were impressed by halo which runs at 30 fps.  i got the same impressions by these launch titles that i did with halo if not more.  i think the jump from the previous generation to the xbox just spoiled a lot of us.  you think that a game "suffers" by running in 30fps when that is the norm for most games that arent fighters or racers.  30fps is fine enough for me, i say keep it at 30 and give us more eye candy.  

[deftonesmx17]

Didnt most xbox games run at only 30fps anyways?

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Feb 22 2006, 11:32 AM)

Didnt most xbox games run at only 30fps anyways?

thats what im saying, most games in general (on console atleast) run at 30 fps, which is more then fine for most games IMO.  

there are devs who will lower the frame rate just to include more effects.  most people think that just because the "next gen" is here we can do away with lower frame rates, pop-up, and other small issues.  however, even though a system is 10x more powerful that just means that the devs will be pushing it even harder and still need to manage the resources of the console.  just because something is more powerful doesnt mean that problems will cease to exist.  IMHO, the more powerful and better looking graphics get, the easier it is to see flaws.

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Feb 22 2006, 11:32 AM)

Didn't most xbox games run at only 30fps anyways?

yeah they did, and the few games that ran at 60FPS or supported actual HD resolutions typically looked like crap otherwise (low poly models, no normal mapping, no decent effects, etc)
Interesting enough I've noticed most people who complain about 30FPS don't even own TVs capable of supporting frame rates higher then that. (not implying that's the case here just something I've noticed)

@Kage's first post
my sentiments EXACTLY


It's been my experience that the people who are "disappointed" with the 360 launch are typically either those who didn't participate in previous console launches, or those who's only other launch experience was the Xbox 1.

You have to realize that the the Xbox 1 was a bit ahead of it's time to begin with, "Last Gen" should be considered the capabilities of the DC, PS2, and GameCube. The Xbox 1 was a bit of an aberration, it was overpowered for it's time by console standards, and because it was built with essentially off the shelf PC hardware developers were able to jump right in and start doing amazing stuff with it.

Look at launch PS2 titles, and then look at PS2 titles coming out now, the difference is almost a generation in itself, Now look at Xbox 1 launch titles and look at more recent ones, There is a difference but it's not as dramatic as that of the PS2.

The PS2 works as a good example because it's a typical console; in that it uses highly specialized hardware that takes programmers a generations worth of time to fully milk it's potential. The Xbox 1 was an aberration of that because being based on a PC it was somewhat demystified from the get go.

If a games utilization of hardware potential can be measured on a scale from 1 to 10 the PS2's launch titles were a 1 or 2 and the ones coming out now are a 9 or 10. The Xbox started around 5 or 6 and is producing the 9s and 10s now.

The Xbox 360 is a typical console in that it uses specialized hardware, the games coming out now are a 1 or 2 out of the possible 10 for potential.

If you've never bought a launch console outside of the Xbox 1 then IMO you're expectations were probably much higher then what they should have been.

IMO, from someone who's owned about every console made in the last 15 years, the 360 is truly next-gen. The game line-up, while lacking a single "killer-app" has more AAA franchises and more of a solid variety of titles then any other console launch in history.

I didn't buy an Xbox 1 until months after it's launch, simply because it didn't have any games that I liked. I wouldn't have bought the 360 at launch if it didn't have any games that I liked, but it did.... and I currently own 9 games for it.

[TraZer]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Feb 22 2006, 04:40 PM)

i understand that is all of your opinion, but dont you think your setting your expectations a bit too high?  

PDZ: i usually can tell the difference between 30 and 60fps and i thought that PDZ ran at 60fps.  also for a xbox port i thought the graphics were great, the only thing that really could have been addressed was the AI.  

CoD2 is far beyond what the xbox can do and that is the truth.  you base your assumptions on guessing when you dont even know the technical merits behind the game.  the AI alone is next gen enough, its far beyond what the xbox could do ever.  

as for the rest i have played and loved them all (accept kameo but only because im not into platformers).  you cant compare games right with each other because game development isnt as black and white as that.  also it would seem that your biggest issue with the games is the 30 fps.  however you were impressed by halo which runs at 30 fps.  i got the same impressions by these launch titles that i did with halo if not more.  i think the jump from the previous generation to the xbox just spoiled a lot of us.  you think that a game "suffers" by running in 30fps when that is the norm for most games that arent fighters or racers.  30fps is fine enough for me, i say keep it at 30 and give us more eye candy.  

I'm not setting my expectations too high I think... sure... Xbox 360 is technically really great... but this kind of hardware should be able to cope with soo much more than this.
When Halo was released it was astonishing... it was something beyond what we saw in games at that time... but today is 2006... hardware and games are evolving, and so I expect a next-gen console to run games in 60fps instead of laggy 30.
30fps was a norm for both PS2 and XBOX.... but 60fps should be a norm for a next-gen, just as most PC gamers today consider it to be a norm to play games in 60fps and above... again... my oppinion

I have a sharp eye when it comes to the framerate, and I can assure you that PDZ does run in somewhere about 30fps... and the graphics are'nt really anything we have'nt seen before... I expect a next-gen console to run games with graphics such as in F.E.A.R for PC.

And believe me... CoD2 for 360 is'nt as far beyond what the original XBOX version is... I have CoD2 for the 360 myself and I play it on a HDTV, and the graphics is pretty much it.
My neighbour has CoD2 for the original XBOX and it's basically the same games with some cut down graphics.
The AI is exactly the same in both versions and what I cant understand is that you say that the AI alone is next-gen, cause "that's" based purely on assumptions itself.

[deftonesmx17]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Feb 22 2006, 01:06 PM)

thats what im saying, most games in general (on console atleast) run at 30 fps, which is more then fine for most games IMO.  

Yeah, I dont really get why that bothers him.

[TraZer]

QUOTE(miggidy @ Feb 22 2006, 07:22 PM)

I hope you're blaming the developer here....

Read what Kage and Twisted just posted, read it a couple of times while you're at it.

I love 60 fps, (yes Twisted it makes a difference even on a standard CRT) but I understand that frame rates are up to the developer.

As far as graphics are concerned, again it's up to the developer.
Compare GOW with COD2, how can you even question the hardware when both games are running on the same chip sets?
This last part isn't directed at you but it's directed at most people in general who for some strange reason, conveniantly forget that Gears of War and games like GUN are running on the same console....

Ofcourse I am blaming the developer... as I said... the hardware is really great, it's nothing wrong with it... but when it's coming to a game like PDZ I expect it to run in 60fps or else I get the feeling that it's all just bad programming... seriously... the machine does have the power to cope with it just as the original XBOX had the power to run Ninja Gaiden (for examle) in 60fps, and did it look crap?... I guess we all have the answer to that one.
I did read what Kage and Twisted wrote, but I believe that the fact about most 60fps games looked crap is just totally wrong.

Ofcourse the graphics and framerates are up to the developer, noone can rule over the developers of a game... but even though it's up to them I have my wishinglist, it's pretty natural.

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(TraZer @ Feb 22 2006, 01:13 PM)

...When Halo was released it was astonishing... it was something beyond what we saw in games at that time...

Just out of curiosity which Xbox 360 FPS style launch games (Condemned, COD2, King Kong, PDZ, or Quake 4) do you consider to not look next gen when compared to the only FPS style Xbox 1 launch game (Halo)

QUOTE(miggidy @ Feb 22 2006, 01:55 PM)

I see!
Well then, this ones on me

I share your distate for devs that take the 30fps route.
I was hoping this was a thing of the past with the next generation but it seems as long as the silver screen remains at 25-29 fps (if I'm not mistaking), we will have to settle for 30 fps.

Thank folks like Sega who always take the 60 fps approach when ever possible, and pay even more thanks to Mr. Itagaki who promises to deliver 60 fps only

I like 60FPS as much as the next guy... but I also run a progressive scan display
and yes Movies run at 27FPS and interlaced 50Hz sets run at 25...

however 30FPS =! laggy
and on an interlaced based display I'm sorry but as long as the frame rate does drop below 30 (which is a different problem altogether) your picture will be identical at 60fps as it is at 30fps.

progressive scan sets can display a max of 1 frame per Hz and interlaced can only max at 1 frame per 2Hz

NTSC is 60Hz and most PAL is 50Hz

if it's progressive you can get 60FPS and 50FPS respectively and if it's interlaced you can only get 30FPS and 20FPS respectivly... it's not theory, it's not speculation, it's a physical fact of life, if you think you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps on an interlaced set you're flat out imagining things